They made a statement not too long ago that we need to get used to the idea of driverless cars hitting pedestrians and I commented that they know its inevitable and are trying to cover thier asses in advanced and here we are, they ran over a kid.
Humans who drive dangerously or while intoxicated are held responsible. Even humans who are driving normally and sober can be held responsible if the law decides that they were at fault. Fatal accidents are investigated by people whose job is specifically to investigate vehicle accidents.
Who is being held responsible when an automated car kills someone?
Even humans who are driving normally and sober can be held responsible if the law decides that they were at fault. Fatal accidents are investigated by people whose job is specifically to investigate vehicle accidents.
That’s a good question, but it’s important to keep in mind that a lot of public judgement here is based off a single headline, not a thorough investigation. The world is messy, and even the best technology will get into accidents due to any number of causes, including children dashing into the road.
In the case where the technology in the car was found to be at fault, I agree that there needs to be a responsible party, but it’s not exactly straightforward. Punishing the driver seems counterintuitive, but may be useful in getting owners to be diligent in selecting safer vehicles. And punishing the company is complicated - if the punishment is just a fine, it will simply be rolled up into their expected expenses. If it’s too damaging, it will chill development of automated driving entirely. I’m not really sure what the best solution is.
They made a statement not too long ago that we need to get used to the idea of driverless cars hitting pedestrians and I commented that they know its inevitable and are trying to cover thier asses in advanced and here we are, they ran over a kid.
How many children get hit and killed by human drivers every year? Why are you only worried now?
Humans who drive dangerously or while intoxicated are held responsible. Even humans who are driving normally and sober can be held responsible if the law decides that they were at fault. Fatal accidents are investigated by people whose job is specifically to investigate vehicle accidents.
Who is being held responsible when an automated car kills someone?
That’s a good question, but it’s important to keep in mind that a lot of public judgement here is based off a single headline, not a thorough investigation. The world is messy, and even the best technology will get into accidents due to any number of causes, including children dashing into the road.
In the case where the technology in the car was found to be at fault, I agree that there needs to be a responsible party, but it’s not exactly straightforward. Punishing the driver seems counterintuitive, but may be useful in getting owners to be diligent in selecting safer vehicles. And punishing the company is complicated - if the punishment is just a fine, it will simply be rolled up into their expected expenses. If it’s too damaging, it will chill development of automated driving entirely. I’m not really sure what the best solution is.